Tag: oppression

The new town of Starbase is canceling its May elections

12:15 pm

Boy, Elon Musk sure is a FASCIST! Because no one filed to run against the mayor and two commissioners, the new town of Starbase is now about to cancel its May elections.

During an upcoming meeting, the Starbase City Commission is scheduled to consider an ordinance canceling the May 2, 2026 General Election, as all candidates for mayor and city commissioner are running unopposed.

Under Texas law, local governments may cancel elections when every race on the ballot is uncontested.

That means Starbase’s current leadership will remain in office without voters needing to cast ballots. The city’s inaugural mayor is Robert “Bobby” Peden, a SpaceX executive who serves as Vice President of Texas Test and Launch for the company. Two commissioners serve alongside him: Jordan Buss, a senior director of environmental health and safety at SpaceX, and Lois Wallace, an interim commissioner and Starbase resident.

Expect to see stupid mainstream stories suggesting no one filed because people were afraid to run against these SpaceX managers and thus threaten their job status. “Musk, that evil fascist, clearly threatened to send out hit men against anyone who filed! Opposition to Musk will not be allowed!”

What I think is really happening is twofold. First, no one at SpaceX is really interested in this boring administrative government work. They’d rather build cutting-edge rockets. Note that the two commissioners are not really rocket engineers, with one being the wife of a SpaceX employee and the other doing “environmental health and safety” work, likely related to making sure SpaceX meets government work regulations. The real engineers at SpaceX have better things to do.

Second, there really isn’t that much for these town officials to do anyway. The town was established mostly to ease SpaceX’s own regulatory red tape with the state, and once established the task is largely done. Why waste time running for a position that will only add to your work load, while accomplishing nothing of real substance?

One comment

Real change at the FCC?

1:51 pm

Brendan Carr during Breitbart interview
Brendan Carr during Breitbart interview

FCC chairman Brendan Carr this week didn’t simply make a public statement yesterday against Amazon, as I reported earlier today. The day earlier, on March 10th, he did an hour-long interview with Breibart News, providing a more complete summary of the FCC’s overall agenda since the change of administrations from Joe Biden to Donald Trump.

You can watch that interview here. To put it mildly, the shift in policy and approach at the FCC is significant, and appears to be generally moving in the right direction.

To understand the context, we need to first review the FCC’s approach during the Biden administration. My regular readers will remember the many stories during that time describing the FCC’s aggressive effort to expand its regulatory power, in many cases in areas completely exceeding its fundamental statutory authority. For example, it proposed new regulations designed to tell satellite companies how and when to de-orbit their satellites. It also wanted to its own bureaucracy for imposing those regulations, and went ahead and created it without any congressional approval. It also under Biden attempted to limit satellite operations that the astronomy community opposed, an action that was once again outside its statute authority.

Overall, the goal of the FCC under Biden was to expand the power of the administrative state, in as many areas as possible. And though there was push back from Congress, as long as a Democrat was president it was clear that this power-grab was going to grow exponentially.

After the 2024 election, however a Democrat was no longer president. Trump quickly moved in 2025 to squash the FCC’s power grab, with a stated public goal to instead streamline FCC regulations and speed license approvals.

Carr’s interview earlier this week essentially gave us an update on that Trump policy, and it appears this new anti-regulatory policy is moving forward, with a goal to eliminate ten regulations for every one regulation added. According to Carr:
» Read more

5 comments

FCC chairman blasts Amazon and its Leo satellite constellation

9:08 am

FCC logo

Brendan Carr, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, yesterday harshly criticized Amazon for filing papers opposing SpaceX’s application to place a million new satellites into orbit while failing to meet its own FCC license requirement to get 1,600 Amazon Leo satellites in orbit by July 2026.

Amazon should focus on the fact that it will fall roughly 1,000 satellites short of meeting its upcoming deployment milestone, rather than spending their time and resources filing petitions against companies that are putting thousands of satellites in orbit.

To put it mildly, Carr’s point is well taken. In legally protesting SpaceX’s proposed constellation while failing to launch on time as promised, Amazon is following what appears to be standard Jeff Bezos’ practice, epitomized by his rocket company Blue Origin. When customers begin favoring others because the Bezos company either submits a poor bid or fails to meet schedules, the Bezos companies routinely go to court in an attempt to squelch that better competition.

Carr is demanding Amazon stop this, and focus instead on getting its own job done for once. Carr is also signaling the FCC’s position on both SpaceX and Amazon. It is likely going to reject Amazon’s filing and give its okay to SpaceX’s million-satellite constellation, in one form or another.

Carr is also telling Amazon that it faces some push back for failing to launch the required number of Amazon Leo satellites on time. Though it is extremely unlikely the FCC will cancel Amazon’s Leo license, the FCC might fine it heavily. Or it could impose new limits on the constellation. Carr is also indicating the FCC will treat future Amazon license applications much more stringently.

5 comments

The Senate cries “Uncle!” on SLS and big goverment with its latest NASA authorization bill

8:01 am

I usually pay relatively little attention to the NASA authorization bills that Congress passes periodically, because these bills are generally nothing more than opportunities for the loudmouths in Congress to use them as a bullhorn to puff themselves up to the public and press. Almost never do such bills really have any real impact on the future, or if they do, that impact is often unintended and negative, as Congress is by and large ignorant about these matters and has priorities counter-productive to getting anything substantive accomplished.

I pay even less attention to authorization bills that have only been approved by a committee, and have not yet been voted on by either house. Such bills are ephemeral and the stuff of fantasy. It is nice to know what’s in them, but until such bills are actually approved by both houses of Congress and signed by the president, their language is even more unworthy of serious attention.

Have the pigs in the Senate learned to stop gorging themselves?
Have the pigs in the Senate learned to stop gorging themselves?

Nonetheless, the NASA authorization bill that was just approved by the Senate Commerce committee is worth reviewing, but not for the reasons that has interested the rest of the mainstream and even the aerospace press.

True, the bill extends ISS until 2032. True, it fully supports the commercial private space stations being built to replace it. True, it endorses NASA administrator Jared Isaacman’s restructuring of the Artemis program. True, it rejects all of Trump’s proposed cuts to NASA’s science programs. And true, it strongly endorses a Moon base as a first step to colonizing Mars.

All of these facts are significant, but to focus on each specifically — as it appears the entire press has done — is to miss the forest for the trees.
» Read more

6 comments

The United Kingdom’s Labor government to spend £500 million on space

10:07 am

The UK Space Agency, gone but not forgotten
The UK Space Agency, gone but not forgotten

My heart be still! The United Kingdom’s present Labor government yesterday announced it has allocated an additional £500 million ($665 million) on a wide range of space projects, all of which are either new government programs or facilities or direct subsidies to its failing space businesses.

Nowhere in this announcement did government officials address the choking regulations and burdensome licensing requirements that have essentially driven away all space business while bankrupting two different rocket startups, Virgin Orbit and Orbex.

In addition to the £1.7 billion committed to European Space Agency (ESA) programmes in November 2025, the government is allocating more than £500 million to national space programmes:

  • £105 million to develop civil capabilities for in-orbit servicing and manufacturing (ISAM) – an emerging market where the UK has a strong competitive edge and opportunities to deliver significant commercial returns and strengthen national resilience
  • £85 million to develop the National Space Operations Centre, including £40 million to build a new ground‑based sensing network, supporting the 24/7 requirement to protect satellites and manage an increasingly crowded space environment
  • £80 million to deliver the Connectivity in Low Earth Orbit (C-LEO) programme, including for a new £30m funding call opened today to support UK businesses developing smarter satellites, advanced hardware and AI‑enabled data delivery
  • £65 million for the National Space Innovation Programme to accelerate breakthrough technologies and boost commercialisation
  • £40 million for the Unlocking Space Programme to drive market demand for space technology, develop national security capabilities and attract private investment to support the scale up of UK firms
  • £37 million to develop space clusters, building on local strengths and ensuring the benefits of space reach every corner of the UK
  • £20 million to accelerate spaceport infrastructure development in Scotland

The announcement was made in connection with the decision by this Labor government to eliminate the UK Space Agency as a separate bureaucracy, consolidating it into the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). The consolidation was intended to save money and make the government more efficient, but this announcement suggests it is being used to funnel more cash into DSIT’s bureaucracy, simply under a different name.

None of this is going to do much to promote an independent space industry in Great Britain. As long as it continues to take years to get launch licenses, rocket companies are not going to launch from its spaceports. And without those launches, its space industry is going to be seriously handicapped. And dumping cash into these various government programs won’t do much either to promote competition or innovation. All the UK will get is more bureaucracy and government control.

7 comments

While Democrats rage against the American/Israel war on Iran, the PEOPLE celebrate

11:05 am

Without doubt there remain great risks and real constitutional issues involved the present military campaign by both the United States and Israel to destroy the Islamic leadership in Iran. First, it is almost impossible to force a change in power solely by air power. This has been tried numerous times, with little success. Killing the leaders of this terrorist Iranian government is a positive step, but it remains entirely unclear whether this war can produce a better government there.

Second, as much as there might be legal precedents that allow President Trump to initiate this action without direct congressional approval, it continues a dangerous trend ceding power away from Congress and to the presidency, in direct opposition to the intentions of the Founding Fathers in their writing of the Constitution. They very much were opposed to giving any president the power to start a war unilaterally.

Pro-U.S. and Israeli demonstrations by Iranians
Click here and here for original videos.

Having stated the reasonable objections to this military action, however, we must now take a look at the two images to the right to see its immediate and very positive consequences. Both pictures are from videos of very spontaneous demonstrations on February 28, 2026 by Iranian refugees celebrating the American/Israeli attacks against Iran.

The top picture is a screen capture from a demonstration in Georgetown, DC. The bottom picture is a screen capture from a demonstration in Austin, Texas.

Note the flags in both pictures. There are numerous flags of Iran (the version during the Shah’s rule, not the version from the Islamic Revolution). There are many American flags, of course, since these demonstrations are in America.

What is most revealing however are the Israeli flags, being enthusiastically waved by Iranians. Clearly the decades of hate against Israel and Jews by the mullahs in Iran has not had any impact on these Iranian refugees. In fact, in the video of the bottom picture they are chanting “Thank you, Bibi!”, referring to Israel’s leader Benjamin Netanyahu as the camera pans across the crowd.

Moreover, these demonstrations took place in two Democratic Party strongholds, cities where pro-Hamas demonstrations have been routine, including rioting and violence against Jews and anyone who dared suggest Israel’s actions in Gaza might be justified.

Nor are these two demonstrations an exception. They have been the rule across the United States and Europe, as well as in Iran itself. The public — the ordinary people for whom governments are meant to serve — seem very much in favor of what President Trump and Netanyahu are doing in Iran. And they are expressing that support of both America and Israel quite unequivocally. If this doesn’t indicate to the world that Israel and the rest of the Middle East can live together in peace and mutual cooperation, nothing can.

This conclusion is further supported by the response by almost every Arab nation in the Middle East, most of whom started off quite willing to let the U.S. and Israel do this deed, with no opposition or with covert support. Now, because of Iran’s indiscriminate attacks on Arab nations, they have all publicly joined the war, allying themselves not with the Islamic nation of Iran but with the U.S. and Israel.

I would not be surprised if Saudi Arabia soon signs the Abraham Accords. Nor would I be surprised if most of the last remaining Arab nations that have not yet done so join Saudi Arabia.

We could very well be seeing a major realignment of alliances in the Middle East that could really really harbinger the beginnings of real peace in that region. Imagine: Israel at peace with all its neighbors, because the Arabs have finally recognized that it is to their own best interest to do so as well.

32 comments

NASA’s corrupt Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel: NASA must be bigger and have more control!

11:36 am

Orion's damaged heat shield
Orion’s damaged heat shield after 2022 flight.
ASAP “Move along! Nothing to see here.”

NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) today released its annual report, and once again it demonstrated why I have been calling it corrupt and a waste of money for years.

The report can be read here [pdf], but let me warn you that its findings have nothing to do with ASAP’s original purpose (created after the 1967 Apollo 1 launchpad fire that killed three astronauts), to look at NASA projects to make sure the agency is not ignoring specific safety issues.

Instead, as it has done repeatedly in recent years, the panel focused on management goals and larger strategic issues, and as usual concluded that the best way to do things is to make NASA bigger with more control over the entire space industry.
» Read more

6 comments

NASA on Starliner: Too much freedom caused the failure!

2:59 pm

Starliner docked to ISS
Starliner docked to ISS in 2024.

NASA today released its final investigation report on the causes behind the Starliner thruster issues during that capsule’s only manned mission in ISS, issues that almost prevented the spacecraft from docking successfully and could have left it manned and out-of-control while still in orbit.

You can read the report here [pdf]. NASA administrator Jared Isaacman made it clear in his own statement that the Starliner incident was far more serious than originally let on.

“To undertake missions that change the world, we must be transparent about both our successes and our shortcomings. We have to own our mistakes and ensure they never happen again. Beyond technical issues, it is clear that NASA permitted overarching programmatic objectives of having two providers capable of transporting astronauts to-and-from orbit, influence engineering and operational decisions, especially during and immediately after the mission. We are correcting those mistakes. Today, we are formally declaring a Type A mishap and ensuring leadership accountability so situations like this never reoccur. We look forward to working with Boeing as both organizations implement corrective actions and return Starliner to flight only when ready.”

A Type A mishap is one in which a spacecraft could become entirely uncontrollable, leading to its loss and the death of all on board. Though Starliner was NOT lost, for a short while as it hung close to ISS that result was definitely possible. Its thrusters were not working. It couldn’t maneuver to dock, nor could it maneuver to do a proper and safe de-orbit. Fortunately, engineers were able to figure out a way to get the thursters operational again so a docking could occur, but until then, it was certainly a Type A situation.

The report outlines in great detail the background behind Starliner’s thruster issues, the management confusion between NASA and Boeing, and the overall confused management at Boeing itself, including its generally lax testing standards.

The report’s recommends that NASA impose greater control over future commercial contracts, noting that under the capitalism model that NASA has been following:
» Read more

50 comments

British rocket startup Skyrora might buy Orbex assets

9:24 am

The British rocket startup Skyrora, which has been around since 2018 and has yet to complete an orbital launch, today indicated it might buy the remaining assets of the now bankrupt British rocket startup Orbex.

The company, which has a manufacturing facility in Cumbernauld, said its move would ensure Orbex technology and the spaceport remained under UK ownership. It also said its bid would safeguard products that had received public funding.

Skyrora has been making promises for almost a decade with no clear progress. It did two successful suborbital tests in 2020 (here and here), had a failed suborbital test in 2022, and applied for an orbital launch license with Britain’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) in January 2024. Not surprisingly, it is unclear whether that license has been approved. The company said last year it wants to do that orbital launch in ’26 from the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands. That gives the CAA two years to approve the license, which based on that agency’s track record might be enough time to get the job done. Or not.

Getting Orbex’s assets might actually be a good thing for Skyrora, which has not been very successful getting anything going with its own engineering. It will still face that odious regulatory regime of the United Kingdom, that has now killed two different rocket startups.

Leave a comment

British rocket startup Orbex goes under

9:10 am

Prime rocket prototype on launchpad
The prototype of Orbex’s never-launched Prime rocket,
on the launchpad in 2022

After waiting four years to get the necessary launch licenses from the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), delays that forced it to abandon its preferred spaceport in Sutherland to go to the SaxaVord spaceport in the Shetland Islands, the British rocket startup Orbex today announced its effort to find a buyer or new financing had failed and it is going into receivership with the goal of selling off its assets.

Orbex has filed a notice of intention to appointment Administrators and will continue trading while all options for the future of the company are explored, including potential sale of all or parts of its business or assets. The notice provides short-term protection and allows the business time to secure as positive an outcome as possible for its creditors, employees and wider stakeholders.

The funding required for Orbex to remain a viable business was sought from a variety of public and private investors during its Series D funding round, which has ultimately failed. Several merger and acquisition opportunities have also been explored, with none resulting in a favourable outcome.

To repeat this company’s sad story, Orbex had hoped to do its first launch from the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland in 2022, but was blocked for four years because of red tape. First, the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority would not issue the spaceport and launch licenses. Second, local opposition delayed approvals as well. Those delays ate into the company’s resources, until it became entirely dependent on grants from the UK government (some through the European Space Agency) to keep it afloat.

By 2024 Orbex realized launching from Sutherland was impossible, and it then switched to the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands. This forced more delays because the company had no facilities there. It had already spent a fortune building everything for Sutherland.

There will be many who will blame this failure on the difficulty of rocket science, but it appears the fault almost entirely lies with the UK government and its odious regulatory regime. Neither Sutherland nor SaxaVord have been able to get anything off the ground, and it appears right now that rocket companies are going everywhere else to find launch sites. New rockets must launch and fail so that they can eventually succeed. The sense I get from the CAA is that it is treating every launch not as a test but as an operational launch that must succeed. Orbex couldn’t meet that standard.

Nor can any other rocket startup. At the moment SaxoVord has only one customer planning to launch, the German startup Rocket Factory Augsburg, but after a static fire explosion in 2024 blocked the launch nothing has happened since. I suspect the company is having problems getting new launch approvals from the CAA.

17 comments

Isaacman issues directive to shift power back to NASA and away from private sector

11:51 am

Jared Isaacman, in announcing this directive
Jared Isaacman, in announcing this directive

NASA administrator Jared Isaacman yesterday issued a major three-part directive which he claimed would save more than a billion dollars at NASA while allowing the agency to “regain its core competencies in technical, engineering, and operational excellence”.

The plan could actually backfire, however, as it appears to shift power and control back to NASA and away from private sector.

First, Isaacman wants to eliminate much of the outside contracting NASA now relies on, bringing that work back into the agency itself. Second, he wants eliminate “restrictive clauses that prevent us from doing our own work and addressing intellectual property barriers that have tied our hands.” Third, he wants to “restore in-house engineering,” having more work done by NASA engineers instead of depending on outside contractors.

To some extent, there is value in all these changes, because in many cases NASA employees use the policy of using contractors to outsource their entire work load, so they can sit and do practically nothing.

Overall however this directive could very well squelch the present renaissance in commercial space, because it will put NASA much more in control of everything. Rather than simply being a customer buying the products built and owned by the private sector (ie, the American people) — the capitalism model — the directive demands that NASA run things, the centralized Soviet-style top-down government model.

This aspect is best illustrated by the second part of his directive. Many contractors, such as SpaceX, do not wish to reveal everything about their product designs to NASA, because then it becomes public and can be stolen by their competitors. By requiring companies to release all proprietary data, those companies will no longer own that data, and thus will no longer be as easily able to benefit from its development. This will discourage private investment. It will also once again centralize development at NASA. Rather than getting multiple ideas and innovation from multiple companies, everything will funnel into the ideas NASA managers and engineers come up with.

Isaacman has come to this directive after spending his first two months as administrator delving into how the agency is operating. But he has gotten the solution entirely backwards. Rather than centralize and expand the work done inside NASA, thus justifying its large workforce that Isaacman has found isn’t doing much, wouldn’t it be better to simply eliminate those government jobs entirely? Trim NASA down to its essentials, and let the American people, not the government, come up with what they need and want in space.

Isaacman is not doing this however. Instead, he is apparently working to rebuild the NASA empire, so that it can once again design all, own all, and control all. That was how things were during the shuttle era, and the result was that for almost a half century, America went nowhere in space.

My doubts and concerns about Isaacman and his priorities, which started during his first nomination hearings, have only increased. Despite being a man who made billions in the free private sector, he increasingly appears to be someone eager to build a government empire to laud over everyone.

31 comments

Midnight repost: How the localized nature of Democrat vote tampering will influence the 2022 election

11:59 pm

The news during the past few weeks revealing scads of new evidence proving the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Donald Trump in Georgia reminded me of my 2022 essay, now reposted below. What I described in that essay was the exact tactic the Democrats used in Georgia, most specifically in Fulton County that covers the heavily Democratic Party dominated city of Atlanta. In some parts of that county Democrats were so dominant that they could work under the radar, and fudge the vote aggressively.

Though a number of my election predictions in this essay turned out wrong, the essay does provide the basics of what happened in 2020, and could still happen in 2028 and beyond, if a real effort is not made to regain some control of this election tampering. And not surprising, the Democrats are now opposing any such reforms with great enthusiasm, using their slander and demagoguery tactics to rile up their base, helped enthusiastically by the propaganda press that works as their public relations arm.

————————
How the localized nature of Democrat vote tampering will influence the 2022 election

Based on the ample evidence of election fraud, corruption, and vote tampering done repeatedly by Democrats nationwide during the 2020 election, we can expect these politicians and their minions to commit similar election crimes in the upcoming 2022 mid-term elections, especially because the effort by some Republicans to reform their state election systems in the key purple states was so effectively blocked by Democrats, by many quisling Republicans, and by a willing leftist press.

It is however important to understand where that election tampering was done in 2020 in order to understand the election fraud to come, as well as creating a strategy to prevent it. As real estate agents like to say, “Location is everything!”, and it appears this applies to election fraud as well.
» Read more

2 comments

Midnight repost: Truth, Justice, and the American Way

11:58 pm

Tonight Diane and I decided to watch again the 1978 Richard Donner movie, Superman. The overall film is lighthearted entertainment that captures the myth of this super-hero perfectly. However, it has two scenes that remain among the best moments in movie history (which you can watch here and here). The first captures the myth in every way. The second shows us that Superman truly stood for the best in America.

In watching the movie tonight again and reliving the myth I grew up with — that great things are possible if you believe and follow sincerely Superman’s motto of “truth, justice, and the American way” — I decided to repost my essay from 2020 where I attempted to explain what that motto really meant.

Enjoy!
———————

The heroic Superman as envisioned in the 1950s
George Reeves as the heroic Superman as envisioned
in the 1950s television show, emulated later by Richard
Donner in his 1978 movie. Click for show’s opening credits.

Truth, Justice, and the American Way

The words spoken during the opening credits of a 1950s children’s television show:

Faster than a speeding bullet.
More powerful than a locomotive.
Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.
Look up in the sky!
It’s a bird.
It’s a plane.
It’s Superman!

Yes, it’s Superman, strange visitor from another planet who came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men.

Superman, who can change the course of mighty rivers, bend steel in his bare hands, and who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for truth, justice, and the American Way.

That television show was obviously Superman, starring George Reeves, and these opening words expressed the mythology and basic ideals by which this most popular of all comic-book super-heroes lived.

I grew up with those words. They had been bequeathed to me by the American generation that had fought and won World War II against the genocidal Nazis, and expressed the fundamental ideals of that generation.

Much of the meaning of these fundamental ideals is outright and clear.
» Read more

12 comments

SpaceX wants revisions to federal rural grant program that has awarded it $733 million

4:05 pm

SpaceX is presently asking for changes in the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program that awards grants to companies that provide internet in rural areas and has already awarded the company $733 million in grants.

BEAD was part of the Biden administration’s bipartisan infrastructure act – originally a $42 billion program to bring broadband internet to areas of the country with little or no broadband access. The Trump administration eliminated other infrastructure act programs, and cut BEAD outlays to $21 billion, along with rule changes to allow satellite providers.

SpaceX applied for BEAD funds in 2025. The company won $733 million worth of BEAD projects nationwide, including $109 million in Texas.

Initially the Biden administration awarded SpaceX almost a billion dollar grant, because its Starlink constellation was the only broadband outlet actually doing the job. Then Musk began to campaign for Republicans, and suddenly the Biden administration pulled that grant, saying absurdly that SpaceX was failing to provide its service to rural areas, when that was exactly what it was doing.

Now SpaceX wants BEAD to ease some of its requirements, and wants these grant funds upfront.

I say, this whole BEAD program is a waste of taxpayer money and a perfect example of crony capitalism. I’m glad Trump cut it in half, but that wasn’t good enough. It should be shut down entirely. SpaceX doesn’t need this handout. It is making money hand-over-fist on its own.

14 comments

A nice summary of all space-based research of reproduction in space

10:12 am

Regulatory recommendations by these scientists
Click for original.

Link here to the press release. The paper itself can be read here.

The paper is an excellent summary of practically all the research that has been done in space and on the ground studying the impact of the harsh environment of space on reproduction. It notes above all that we really know very little despite this research, because the risks to the newborn have precluded direct study. From the paper’s abstract:

Despite over 65 years of human spaceflight activities, little is known of the impact of the space environment on the human reproductive systems during long-duration missions. Extended time in space poses potential hazards to the reproductive function of female and male astronauts, including exposure to cosmic radiation, altered gravity, psychological and physical stress, and disruption to circadian rhythm.

This review encapsulates current understanding of the effects of spaceflight on reproductive physiology, incorporating findings from animal studies, a recent experiment on sperm motility, and omics-based insights from astronaut physiology. Female reproductive systems appear to be especially vulnerable, with implications for oogenesis and embryonic development in microgravity. Male reproductive function reveals compromised DNA integrity, even when motility appears to be preserved. This review examines the limited embryogenesis studies in space, which show frequent abnormal cell division and impaired development in rodents.

In the paper’s conclusion, these academics sadly revert to type, and propose the establishment of an international regulatory framework for controlling this issue, as shown in the graphic to the right. This is empty foolishness, because such regulations will only do more harm than good, stifling research while failing to accomplish anything.

12 comments

Midnight repost: Genocide is coming to America

11:58 pm

Today I came across this tweet:

Brandon Straka Tweet
Click to see video in tweet.

The comparison between the tactics of the Nazi storm troopers and our modern Antifa thugs is apt. It illustrates the time we now live in. It also immediately made me want to repost my 2020 essay, Genocide is coming to America. That essay sadly remains pertinent, because the same unwillingness of decent Germans to believe the Nazis were a threat is the same unwillingness of too many modern Americans to believe the same thing about Antifa and the Democratic Party (which now enthusiastically uses Antifa as its storm troopers).

Worse, we now have a large minority of Americans who support this violent behavior. To them, violence is wholly justified against those who disagree with them. The proof of this horrible fact was demonstrated in the 2025 elections, where in Virginia a Democrat won his election despite openly wishing death not only on a Republican but on that Republican’s children, while in New York an anti-Semitic communist won election as mayor.

————————-
Genocide is coming to America

In my last visit to Israel in 2018, my brother and sister-in-law took me sight-seeing to the northern parts of Israel near the Sea of Galilee. On our first night, we stayed at the home of one of their older friends, a man in his seventies.

That night we sat around their kitchen table so that they could catch up on family matters. At one point in the conversation our host reminisced about an older woman, now gone, who he had known in his childhood in the 1950s who had lived in Germany before and during World War II and had survived a concentration camp.
» Read more

11 comments

FAA moves forward on its environmental assessment of SpaceX’s proposal to launch Starship/Superheavy from Kennedy Space Center

12:01 pm

Proposed Starship/Superheavy launchsites at Kennedy and Cape Canaveral
Proposed Starship/Superheavy launchsites at
Kennedy (LC-39A) and Cape Canaveral (SLC-37)

While NASA has already determined that Starship/Superheavy launches from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida will have no significant impact on the environment, the FAA has not yet completed its own environmental impact statement.

Last week it released a preliminary summary [pdf] of its impact statement, revealing that it has reduced its final options to either approving SpaceX’s request to do as many as 44 launches per year, or to reject any changes — the “no action alternative” — which would block all Starship/Superheavy launches at Kennedy.

The overall tone of this summary suggests strongly that the FAA is almost certainly going to approve SpaceX’s request, allowing as many as 44 launches per year from launchpad LC-39A, as shown on the map to the right. As it notes in describing the “no action alternative”:

SpaceX would not launch Starship-Super Heavy from LC-39A. NASA would not develop, implement, or approve agreements with SpaceX associated with Starship-Super Heavy operations at LC-39A. The No Action Alternative would not meet the purpose and need. [emphasis mine]

In other words, rejecting SpaceX’s request would not fulfill the FAA’s obligation to serve the public. It would also not fulfill the FAA’s obligation to serve a fellow government agency, NASA, which has already approved this SpaceX request in a 2019 environmental assessment.

It appears a final decision by the FAA is imminent. A nice summary of this FAA document can be found here, which notes that if approved, it will give SpaceX license approval to launch Starship/Superheavy as much as 146 times per year, from its launchpads at Boca Chica, Kennedy, and Cape Canaveral. Note too that this FAA assessment is independent of the Air Force’s environment assessment, which has already approved 76 launches per year at the SLC-37 launchpad.

6 comments

Orbex failure occurred partly because UK government withheld promised funding

10:34 am

Prime rocket prototype on launchpad
The prototype of Orbex’s never-launched Prime rocket,
on the launchpad in 2022

It appears the government of the United Kingdom contributed to the bankruptcy and sale of the British rocket startup Orbex in more than one way.

Orbex had hoped to do its first launch from the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland in 2022, but was blocked for four years because of red tape. First, the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority would not issue the spaceport and launch licenses. Second, local opposition delayed approvals as well. Those delays ate into the company’s resources, until it became entirely dependent on grants from the UK government (some through the European Space Agency) to keep it afloat.

Orbex’s problems were further compounded when it became clear in 2024 that the Sutherland spaceport would never get clearance. Orbex then switched to the Saxavord spaceport in the Shetland Islands, but this forced more delays because the company had no facilities there. It had already spent a fortune building everything for Sutherland.

A new report today says that it was finally forced to shut down and sell its assets to the French startup The Exploration Company because the UK government had withheld some of that promised funding.

News of the potential sale came just a month after a European Space Agency document confirmed that €112 million of €144 million UK government funding, earmarked for the European Launcher Challenge (ELC) scheme, was still “to be distributed”.

As a result, Orbex received just €34.9 million from the scheme – one-fifth of the €169 million awarded to each of its rivals by European governments.

That shortfall equates to about $160 million, a substantial amount of cash. While it is perfectly reasonable for the UK government to withheld these funds if it thinks the money would be badly spent, none of this government funding would not have been necessary at all if the UK government had simply issued the launch permits in a timely manner, allowing Orbex to launch and earn revenue.

As I noted early, congratulations to the United Kingdom, the place where rocket companies go to die! This is now the second such company killed by UK red tape and government incompetence, the first being Virgin Orbit.

8 comments

Russian official says Soyuz launchpad repair likely delayed

9:48 am

According to the Russian official in charge of ground infrastructure at Roscosmos, the repair of Russia’s only Soyuz launchpad for launching Progress and Soyuz capsules to ISS might not be completed by late March, as Roscosmos has previously promised.

It appears the winter weather at Baikonur is causing issues. In addition:

Barmin explained that the new service platform had to be assembled from components manufactured at different times and sometimes mismatching each other, requiring on-site modifications. For example, the core of the spare platform was manufactured in 1977 in accordance with a different set of blueprints for a planned-but-never-implemented refurbishment of another Soyuz pad, Barmin said. When it was shipped from an arsenal in the city of Tambov to Baikonur, the set of hardware was incomplete, requiring it to be complemented with parts from other sources and with newly manufactured elements.

It also appears the Russian government is going to make scapegoats of the workers who handled the launch platform during the November 2025 launch. It has placed them under criminal investigation. The managers, whom according to one report demanded the launch take place even though these workers could not get the platform properly fastened in place, appear to have been cleared of wrong-doing.

Until this pad is repaired, Russia has no way to launch any manned missions. Nor can it send cargo to ISS.

The decision to scapegoat the workers will further hinder work, as it will certainly damage morale. Such an approach also helps explain why there has been several cases of sabotage of Soyuz and Progress capsules while they are being prepped for launch.

5 comments

Oman says it wants to sign the Artemis Accords

9:17 am

Middle East, showing Oman's proposed spaceport
The Middle East, showing the location of
Oman’s proposed spaceport at Duqm.

In a diplomatic meeting between Oman and U.S. state department in Oman, Oman officials announced their Sultan wants his country to sign the Artemis Accords.

The two sides discussed means of maximising the benefits of the Free Trade Agreement between the two countries and augmenting American investments in sectors of priority for the Sultanate of Oman. These sectors include the digital economy, technology and space, in addition to mining, logistics, aviation and infrastructure.

Cooperation in the fields of education and culture was also discussed, particularly educational programmes, academic and professional exchange and investment in research and innovation. The two sides further exchanged views and positions on a number of regional and international issues, emphasising the importance of backing efforts for peace, stability and development.

During the dialogue, the Omani side announced the Sultanate of Oman’s approval to join the ‘Artemis Accords’ for space exploration. A cooperation statement on the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States of America was also signed. [emphasis mine]

Much of this is diplomatic blather, meaning little. While I would expect the Trump administration welcome Oman as an Artemis Accord partner, in the talks related to the highlighted first paragraph above it likely demanded some concessions first. Free trade in Oman is going to require some protection for American technology.

For example, right now State Department rules make it difficult if not impossible to launch American satellites or rockets from Oman’s proposed spaceport in Duqm, rules imposed because Oman cannot be trusted. I expect the State Department is demanding total security control from U.S. entities on any launch before agreeing to an Oman Artemis Accord agreement.

Leave a comment

Isar postpones 2nd Spectrum rocket launch attempt, no new date set

10:24 am

Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe
Proposed or active spaceports in North Europe

The German rocket startup Isar Aerospace yesterday canceled its second attempt to launch its Spectrum rocket from Norway’s Andoya spaceport, citing an issue with a “pressurization valve”.

We are standing down from today’s launch attempt to address an issue with a pressurization valve. The teams are currently assessing the next possible launch opportunities and a new target date will be announced shortly.

The update also stated the company is moving to a “new launch window” without noting the dates of that window. This statement however suggests that no new launch attempt will occur for at least a month. And considering it is winter at Andoya in the high north, it is quite possible the launch will be delayed until March.

Meanwhile, Andoya continues to lead the race to become the first spaceport in Europe to achieve an orbital launch. Sweden’s Estrange spaceport is limited because of its interior location. The two sea platforms proposed for the North Sea are not yet ready.

And the United Kingdom has effectively eliminated itself from the competition. Its bureaucracy and Byzantine regulations have now put two rocket companies out of business, and that same red tape (combined with location opposition) has essentially shut down the Sutherland spaceport. I doubt there are any rocket companies willing to deal with the UK at this point.

Leave a comment

Orbex’s Danish subsidiary to file for bankruptcy

8:30 am

In what appears to confirm the story yesterday that the rocket startup Orbex was about to be bought out by the French startup The Exploration Company — thus likely ending operations in Great Britain — there was a second follow-up story later in the day that claimed Orbex’s Danish subsidiary is about to file for bankruptcy.

On 20 January, more than 15 Orbital Express Launch ApS employees announced at around the same time on LinkedIn that they were looking for work. Since then, European Spaceflight has received confirmation from three independent sources, who wished to remain anonymous, that the subsidiary has dismissed its entire workforce, with the company expected to officially file for bankruptcy on 22 January.

The article notes that this subsidiary had been losing millions in the past two years, and was entirely reliant on cash from its parent company. Unfortunately, Orbex has had no incoming revenue itself, because red tape in the United Kingdom had prevented it from launching for the past four years.

If true, this story confirms that Orbex’s negotiations with The Exploration Company is likely an attempt to make as much money from its remaining assets as possible before closing down.

Congratulations to the United Kingdom, the land where rocket companies go to die!

2 comments

French startup The Exploration Company negotiating purchase of UK rocket startup Orbex

8:39 am

Prime rocket prototype on launchpad
The prototype of Orbex’s never-launched Prime rocket,
on the launchpad in 2022

In what appears to be a direct consequence of British red tape blocking Orbex from launching in the past four years, it is now in negotiations to sell its assets to the French startup The Exploration Company.

On 21 January, Orbex published a brief press release stating that a letter of intent had been signed and that negotiations had begun. The company added that all details about the transaction remain confidential at this stage. A statement from Orbex CEO Phil Chambers suggests that the company’s financial position factored into its decision to pursue a buyer. “Our Series D fundraising could have led us in many directions,” said Chambers. “We believe this opportunity plays to the strengths of both businesses, and we look forward to sharing more when the time is right.”

Let me translate: In 2022 Orbex had set up a factory close to the proposed Sutherland spaceport on the north coast of Scotland, had signed a 50 year lease with that facility to launch its Prime rocket there, had built a launch platform and tested a prototype of the rocket, and was poised to do its first launch. All it needed was license approvals from the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

And then it waited, and waited, and waited, and waited. By 2024 it gave up on Sutherland, because the authorities (local and national) kept rejecting its spaceport license for environmental and political reasons. It switched its launch site to the SaxaVord spaceport on the Shetland Islands, pushing back that first launch to 2026. Along the way the UK gave it a $25 million grant, likely to keep the company above water because the UK was blocking its ability to launch.

All for naught. It is very clear Orbex has run out of cash waiting, and is now looking to salvage its work by selling everything to the French company, which so far has focused on building a cargo capsule to supply the upcoming commercial space stations.

If the sale goes through, do not be surprised if Orbex’s assets exit the UK entirely. And at that point, the CAA’s red tape can be given credit for destroying a second rocket company, following Virgin Orbit.

5 comments

The European Space Agency and China hold the first joint meeting in almost a decade

9:50 am

ESA logo

The European Space Agency (ESA) this week hosted the leaders of the China National Space Administration (CNSA) in Paris, the first such joint meeting since 2017.

The meeting was co-chaired by ESA Director General Josef Aschbacher and CNSA Administrator Shan Zhongde. Both ESA and CNSA had unique achievements to share and discuss since the last time the heads of agencies met in person.

Both highlighted joint successes in space science, notably the Tianguan (Einstein Probe) launch with ESA hardware, and progress on the joint Smile mission, set to launch this year. Similarly, the two sides addressed the successful Chang’e-6 mission carrying ESA’s NILS instrument, ESA’s first experiment on the lunar surface. In the field of telemetry and tracking, both looked back on their long-term cooperation in supporting science and exploration missions. In discussing their respective space safety and Earth observation related programmes, the importance of cooperation to protect our planet and climate was recognised on both sides.

It was discussed, that building past progress, both sides in their respective institutional contexts would explore potential opportunities for further collaboration in areas such as Earth and space science.

Let me translate: We in Europe have found that our cooperative Soviet-style government-run projects with NASA (ISS, Mars Sample Return, and Lunar Gateway) are going away, and we need to find some other authoritarian nation we can partner with.

You see, the bureaucrats in Europe like their Soviet-style government-run space program, and are actually offended that the U.S. is shifting from that approach to the capitalism model, an independent industry run by private enterprise. Moreover, these bureaucrats at ESA are finding their own political support dwindling within the ESA’s member nations, many of whom are adopting the same private industry approach as the U.S.

Thus, rather than embrace freedom, competition, and capitalism — the principles that once made Europe great — they look to China now to help fund their government projects. How so very governmental of them!

It is likely some space projects will come of this, but if the U.S. remains steadfast in support of freedom and private enterprise, it will flow like a tidal wave over anything ESA and China develop.

2 comments

Comparing the global ground stations of China and the U.S.

10:49 am

Link here. The article is an excellent review of China’s ground stations located globally, noting how its network is far more limited that the United States, caused by a lack of trust of its intentions by foreign countries.

China currently has access to at least 18 overseas space facilities in Africa, Antarctica, Latin America, South Asia, and the South Pacific. There is no evidence to suggest that any of these countries might expel China’s space tracking and surveillance stations anytime soon. But the longevity of these sites is more precarious than those of the United States. Changing political conditions and concern that these sites may play a role in a conflict involving the United States could undermine China’s ability to maintain key parts of its overseas space tracking network.

The article then notes how China has recently lost stations in Australia, New Zealand, and the Czech Republic and has been forced to field a fleet of ocean-going satellite-tracking ships, similar to what the Soviet Union did during the Cold War.

One comment

Scientists: Methane from spacecraft landing on the Moon could “obscure” evidence of life

12:31 pm

Chicken Little rules!
Chicken Little rules!

Chicken Little stupidity now abounds everywhere! Scientists using computer models say the methane fuel that many lunar landers will use can spread quickly across the entire Moon and then “obscure” any evidence of life that might be found there.

Sinibaldi and Francisca Paiva, a physicist at Instituto Superior Técnico and lead author of the study, built a computer model to simulate how that contamination might play out, using the European Space Agency’s Argonaut mission as a case study. The simulations focused on how methane, the main organic compound released during combustion of Argonaut propellants, might spread across the lunar surface during a landing at the moon’s South Pole. While previous studies had investigated how water molecules might move on the moon, none had done so for organic molecules like methane. The new model also accounted for how factors like solar wind and UV radiation would impact the methane’s behavior.

…The model showed exhaust methane reaching the North Pole in under two lunar days. Within seven lunar days (almost 7 months on Earth), more than half of the total exhaust methane had been “cold trapped” at the frigid poles — 42% at the South Pole and 12% at the North.

Though this result is of interest, as it suggests such exhaust can spread quickly on a low-gravity planet with no atmosphere, these scientists then make themselves look like fools by claiming this quick spread will contaminate the Moon, thus hindering the search for evidence of life there, and thus require new “planetary protection” measures. From their paper’s conclusion:

As lunar exploration unfolds, prioritizing effective and informed planetary protection measures will be key for safeguarding the Moon’s pristine scientific value and paving the way for a sustainable and responsible lunar exploration.

The level of foolishness in these claims is hard to measure. The Moon is the least likely place to search for evidence of past life. And regardless, limiting the use of methane fuel but allowing other exploration is not going to solve their problem. The mere presence of human activity is going to “contaminate” the Moon’s “pristine” environment. To make believe it is possible to impose some rules to prevent it is idiocy.

This whole study and its focus on “planetary protection” is really aimed at protecting the turf of these scientists. If others are allowed to explore the planets with different goals (profit or settlement instead of pure scientific research), their playground will be spoiled. Thus, they write these reports designed to give them ammunition for convincing governments to impose regulations in their favor. And they know they have allies in the UN for this purpose.

They also know they have willing allies in the propaganda press. Be prepared for numerous mainstream stories in the next day or so, touting this study with no skepticism.

16 comments

SpaceX pulls Starlink service from Papua New Guinea

9:23 am

SpaceX has now withdrawn the Starlink services it informally had provided customers in Papua New Guinea after a volcano eruption in 2021 due to regulatory demands by the government there.

It’s been two and a half years since a volcano eruption tore apart Tonga’s underwater internet cables, and a sympathetic Kiwi MP pleaded to Elon Musk for help on their behalf. Musk, CEO of SpaceX, would answer Shane Reti’s call, offering his Starlink technology in aid of their reconnection to the world.

Starlink’s Pacific debut came with limited trials in American-owned Guam and the Northern Marianas, followed by the Cooks in April 2021. But for the wider Pacific community, its deployment in Tonga captured hearts and minds. The service, provided by a special satellite network, has been hailed as “transformational” in numerous island nations, broadening internet coverage to remote areas, some for the first time.

That is, unless, you’re in Papua New Guinea. Starlink’s attempts to gain licensing in PNG have been tied up since December 2023, with the Ombudsman Commission challenging the government over Starlink’s reliability. The Commission blocked licensing efforts in February 2024, and have argued that existing regulations may not be adequate to manage potential risks to public interest and safety.

In-fighting within Papua New Guinea’s government continues to block Starlink license approval, so it appears SpaceX has decided the best way to get a positive decision is to walk away, hoping the ensuing pressure from its customers might force action from the government.

9 comments

Another American orbital capsule company turns to Australia for a landing spot

11:38 am

Proposed Australian spaceports
Australian spaceports: operating (red dot) and proposed (red “X”)
Click for original image.

The American orbital capsule company Lux Aeterna has now signed a deal with the Australian spaceport startup Southern Launch to allow its capsules to land at its Koonibba Test Range in southern Australia.

Under the agreement, two Lux Aeterna Delphi satellites will return to the Koonibba Test Range with Southern Launch. The first mission is targeted to return in 2027.

Lux Aeterna, based in Denver, Colorado, USA, is developing a reusable satellite platform designed to operate in Low Earth Orbit and support defense, intelligence, and commercial missions such as technology demonstrations, hypersonic and materials testing, in-orbit servicing, and in-space manufacturing. The Delphi platform and its core components are engineered to withstand the thermal and structural demands of atmospheric re-entry, enabling routine return and recovery of both the satellite bus and payload to support expedited technology development.

…Under the partnership, Southern Launch will provide end‑to‑end services for each orbital re-entry, including regulatory approvals, range operations, air and maritime coordination, and recovery operations.

This is the second American orbital capsule company to sign with Southern Launch. Varda was the first, and it did so because red tape in the U.S. made use of an American drop zone impractical. It appears Lux Aeterna has come to the same conclusion, and thus went to Australia instead.

This is an issue that needs to be addressed by the Trump administration. It is absurd that red tape is forcing American capsules to land in another country on the other side of the globe.

One comment

There is little good will on the left, and the right seems eager to lose it too

12:46 pm

Good will toward men
This is what the Christmas season stands for.

The New Testament words celebrating the birth of Jesus are clear and bright, and are repeated by everyone in these weeks before the holiday: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”

The colloquial phrase people normally say this time of year is usually “Peace on Earth and good will toward men!”, with the hope that both will come to all.

It appears unfortunately that the idea of “good will” is vanishing from American society, and maybe for all of western civilization. Good will means you treat all persons with respect, even if you disagree with them. You also hope that everyone achieves the best they can in their personal lives, even your enemies. You don’t wish harm on others, only oppose anyone from doing harm to others.

Such good will once dominated American society. Just think of the 1946 film It’s a Wonderful Life! to get a taste of that American culture. In politics, there was often fierce debate, but after the Civil War especially the culture decided it was better to talk things out with good will to all then to grab guns and kill each other.

And most of all, during each year’s Christmas season the desire to promote good will was everywhere, in everyone’s hearts and minds.

This ideal now appears to be vanishing. On the left that vanishing began with the election of Donald Trump in 2016, and has accelerated since. You cannot have a reasonable or rational discussion with practically anyone on the left about Trump. He is the devil incarnate to them, and anyone who even expresses the slightest positive thought about him must be blackballed, slandered, and even killed.

Think I am exaggerating? The widow of Charlie Kirk doesn’t think so. Neither does Donald Trump, who survived two assassination attempts. Nor does someone like Elon Musk, who now readily admits he can no longer appear in public out of fear of violence because of his support of Trump in the 2024 election.

A more benign but equally ugly example of this lack of good will occurred just last week — in the midst of this year’s Christmas season — and the anger and hate didn’t just come from the left. Watch the vile behavior of this leftist woman in a Walmart when she saw an senior citizen and Target worker wearing a Charlie Kirk “Freedom” t-shirt (warning: her language is decidedly obscene):
» Read more

14 comments

Florida opposition grows against renewing Blue Origin’s wastewater permit

9:32 am

Chicken Little strikes again!
Chicken Little gains support!

It appears the political opposition by local politicians and activists against renewing Blue Origin’s wastewater permit for its Florida rocket facilities is growing, and could result in major delays for the company.

Four weeks ago, Cocoa Beach Realtor Jill Steinhauser launched an online petition opposing Blue Origin’s draft permit to discharge wastewater into the Indian River Lagoon, writing that “decades of nutrient pollution, algae blooms, seagrass collapse, habitat loss, and record manatee deaths have pushed this fragile ecosystem to the edge.” Since then, Space Coast buzz has significantly grown opposing Blue Origin’s permit-renewal bid to operate a 490,000-gallon-per-day industrial wastewater treatment facility at its massive rocket manufacturing plant just south of the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex.

And on Thursday, Dec. 18 — the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s deadline date for public comment — Steinhauser submitted 43,475 verified petition signatures to the state agency.

A five-year permit had first been issued in 2020, and now needs to be renewed. Steinhauser’s campaign has apparently caught the interest of local Democratic Party politicians, who see another great way for them to to block another American success. In early December the Democrats on the Brevard county commission came out against renewing the permit, and followed up with an official vote of opposition shortly thereafter. This was then backed by the Cape Canaveral City Council on December 16th. That same week “eight Democratic state legislators signed a letter opposing Blue Origin’s draft permit.”

It appears that unlike SpaceX’s closed loop system, Blue Origin’s system is open-looped, which carries the possibility that its system can overflow into the Indian River Lagoon. However, officials from Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) note that the system has more than ample capacity to avoid such an overflow.

The facility’s flow averages about 40,000 gallons per day, which is less than 10% of the maximum limit. The industrial wastewater covered by the permit does not come into contact with fuel or other hazardous materials, and it is discharged into a 9¼-acre stormwater retention pond. If the pond reaches its designed holding capacity during heavy rainfall, it overflows through a 3-mile-long drainage ditch along Ransom Road before eventually reaching the lagoon.

Though it is likely that this opposition will fail in the end, it could cause a delay in the permit renewal. If that happens, Blue Origin might find its launch plans for 2026 seriously hampered.

9 comments
1 2 3 … 258